Literature Review: Achievement and Attitude in Academies

1. Literature Review: Achievement and Attitude in Academies Linda Heidenrich

2. Research Questions • How does participation in an academy affect achievement? • How does participation in an academy affect attitude?

3. Literature Review • Academy • Achievement • Attitude

4. Academies • Stern, Dayton & Raby, 2000 • “durable and best-tested component of high school reform” • Shorr & Hon, 1999 • Hollywood High School • Reini, 2004 • Columbus, Ohio

5. Achievement • SISS, 1988 and TISS, 2003 • EdSource Online, 2007 • SOLUTIONS TO ACHIEVEMENT • Patrick, 1991 • “emphasize active learning, thinking and doing” • “use multiple resources and media” • “involve parents as monitors…encouragers” • California Partnership Academies • 280 academies (2006-2007)

6. Attitude • Munby, 1983 & 1997; Moore & Foy, 1996 • Scientific Attitude Inventory • Baker et al., 1992 • “Letting Students Speak: Triangulation of Qualitative and Quantitative Assessments of Attitude Toward Science”

7. Methodology • Sophomores College Prep Students • Predominantly Hispanic, 15-16 years of age • Academy students: 50% at risk academically • Average GPA of 2.0 or lower • Classified as Basic, Below Basic, Far Below Basic on CST • Two one-month periods due to block schedule • Non-Academy: September-October • Academy: February-March • Achievement: test scores, class work scores, project scores • Attitude: surveys and interviews

8. Project grades:

9. Class work grades:

10. Test grades:

11. Summary of Data • Project grades overall higher for Academy students • Class work grades overall higher for Academy students • Test grades overall higher for Non-Academy students

12. Sample Survey Questions

13. Sample Interview Answers

14. Sample Interview Answers (con’t)

15. Summary of Findings • Achievement: • Greater in non-academy for tests (t=0.0005) • Slightly greater in academy for projects-Not statistically significant (t=0.3) • Equal for class work (t=0.5) • Attitude: • Equal for majority of questions • More positive attitude for academy • Career goals and post-secondary goals • Value of Science classes • Academy turned negative idea about science into positive through support

16. Conclusions • Non-academy students: • True CP: don’t perform as well during class but successful on tests • Academy students: • Hard workers but poor test takers • Academy structure improves attitude in classes • College Going Environment more profound effect on Academy students • Career Information and guest speakers have impact on attitude of students

17. Recommendations • For Academy: • Offer alternative assessments for tests, such as projects • Offer test-taking strategies • For Non-Academy • Provide more opportunities for community building • Provide more exposure to career pathways

18. Limitations of Study • Not true academy structure • No time or compensation for coordinator • Administrator oversees multiple programs • Developing community support and curriculum • Personnel Changes • Small Sample Size • Remaining Students: Highly motivated • First Year on Block Schedule • Teaching changed between non-academy and academy • For Study: only common assignments included

19. Future Studies • Follow up study in four years with academy students to see if achieved post-secondary goals • Similar study in 3-5 years once established as academy to see if data can be duplicated

20. Thanks… • My family for proofreading and encouraging • Steve for support and junk food runs • The cohort for 2 years of Wednesday night memories: good, bad and ugly! • My professors for making me a better teacher and pushing me further than I thought I could go